The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Yes you read It right.
Jeez what a serious let down!
Ever since I had my system since the famous Price drop the days of disappointment continued to gain momentum, day after day.
At first I said, hell, not a bad system. But urghh, the 'Supposed' gaming greats really showed what this system is really worth!
Ive quite a healthy selection of Title's now and I have to ask one thing: "Where on earth are all the wonderful games?" "Where on earth is the wonderful Dreamcast beating visuals?"
Yes I have to say Many of the Dreamcasts games surpass anything I have seen on PS2!
Take a look at Skies of Arcadia, wonderful visuals, wonderful game and yet there is nothing of it's type on PS2 a year in!
Sonic Adventure 2 and Even the Shenmue series would put all the PS2 title's to utter shame.
Simply being the reason that we where all promised a 'Super-Duper' visual machine coupled with the oh so supposedly lovely 'Emotion engine', but darn have I saw any evidence of visual splendour! Where Is It?
Even Metal Gear Solid 2 going by the Demo doesn't even surpass the visuals of Shenmue 1 or 2!
And don't argue that It does, because I have the games and It doesn't!! Full stop!!. MGS2 Demo is good yes, but weren't we expected better from the Great PS2?
And thats just the visual side that Disappoints, theres the problem with the 'oh so many great AAA games' too.
Ive my fair share of the supposed PS2 greats and boy have I grown tired of them! I didn't at first mind you, but then I realised, 'Dreamcast could do all that! But with the PS2 We where promised better'!
And so we where!. I know what I'm talking about too, Im a true PS Fan with a Gigantic library to put many to shame.
On the let down's, one example Iv'e seen In recent days Is Crash Bandicoot on PS2, to be totally honest I didn't see much difference in this game from It's PS counterpart!
Why Is this? Come on PS2 Developers! give us something with a bit of oomph!!, give us what we where promised!!, visuals in next gen style!!, GTA3 was recently a prime example too of great gameplay but lacking in the promised Next Gen Visuals.
And you know what? Can you really blame Sony giving a statement in releasing a successor to the PS2 within 2 years? After seeing the visual might and technology of Gamecube and X-box?
Who can blame them, In my opinion, the PS2 is a BIG let down and thats that, Iv'e changed my opinion yes, but then I have givin the system long enough to prove its worth and It hasn't!
(I'm expecting to see the Zealot's quoting part's word for word, yawn!)
Jeez what a serious let down!
Ever since I had my system since the famous Price drop the days of disappointment continued to gain momentum, day after day.
At first I said, hell, not a bad system. But urghh, the 'Supposed' gaming greats really showed what this system is really worth!
Ive quite a healthy selection of Title's now and I have to ask one thing: "Where on earth are all the wonderful games?" "Where on earth is the wonderful Dreamcast beating visuals?"
Yes I have to say Many of the Dreamcasts games surpass anything I have seen on PS2!
Take a look at Skies of Arcadia, wonderful visuals, wonderful game and yet there is nothing of it's type on PS2 a year in!
Sonic Adventure 2 and Even the Shenmue series would put all the PS2 title's to utter shame.
Simply being the reason that we where all promised a 'Super-Duper' visual machine coupled with the oh so supposedly lovely 'Emotion engine', but darn have I saw any evidence of visual splendour! Where Is It?
Even Metal Gear Solid 2 going by the Demo doesn't even surpass the visuals of Shenmue 1 or 2!
And don't argue that It does, because I have the games and It doesn't!! Full stop!!. MGS2 Demo is good yes, but weren't we expected better from the Great PS2?
And thats just the visual side that Disappoints, theres the problem with the 'oh so many great AAA games' too.
Ive my fair share of the supposed PS2 greats and boy have I grown tired of them! I didn't at first mind you, but then I realised, 'Dreamcast could do all that! But with the PS2 We where promised better'!
And so we where!. I know what I'm talking about too, Im a true PS Fan with a Gigantic library to put many to shame.
On the let down's, one example Iv'e seen In recent days Is Crash Bandicoot on PS2, to be totally honest I didn't see much difference in this game from It's PS counterpart!
Why Is this? Come on PS2 Developers! give us something with a bit of oomph!!, give us what we where promised!!, visuals in next gen style!!, GTA3 was recently a prime example too of great gameplay but lacking in the promised Next Gen Visuals.
And you know what? Can you really blame Sony giving a statement in releasing a successor to the PS2 within 2 years? After seeing the visual might and technology of Gamecube and X-box?
Who can blame them, In my opinion, the PS2 is a BIG let down and thats that, Iv'e changed my opinion yes, but then I have givin the system long enough to prove its worth and It hasn't!
(I'm expecting to see the Zealot's quoting part's word for word, yawn!)
Page:
Sibs wrote:
> Ant wrote:
And Roque Leader not so much
> of a realistic game, and it's
> not a 3rd person adventure either.
NOT SO DETAILED!!! I'm sorry but how
> biased do you want to be? Have you seen the up close shots of the Death Star
> trench run and the HUGE star destroyers? Have you seen how detailed the tiny
> little ground troops are on the battle of hoth? Have you seen how detailed the
> craft are just in the hangers?!?
When the first movies of it were shown,
> people took a while to realise it wasn't the film being shown and you say it's
> not that detailed?!?
But all they do is the same thing over and over again! Like in Tekken Tag Tournament!
And while you talk about these games, they are at least 6 months from being released, and we all know what Nintendo are like with release dates.
> Ant wrote:
And Roque Leader not so much
> of a realistic game, and it's
> not a 3rd person adventure either.
NOT SO DETAILED!!! I'm sorry but how
> biased do you want to be? Have you seen the up close shots of the Death Star
> trench run and the HUGE star destroyers? Have you seen how detailed the tiny
> little ground troops are on the battle of hoth? Have you seen how detailed the
> craft are just in the hangers?!?
When the first movies of it were shown,
> people took a while to realise it wasn't the film being shown and you say it's
> not that detailed?!?
But all they do is the same thing over and over again! Like in Tekken Tag Tournament!
And while you talk about these games, they are at least 6 months from being released, and we all know what Nintendo are like with release dates.
And isn't it usually the Nintys who say graphics don't matter??
But how could you say GTA3 doesn't have next-gen visuals?? They fit in perfectly with the game (as Goatboy said,) and everything looks brilliant.
But how could you say GTA3 doesn't have next-gen visuals?? They fit in perfectly with the game (as Goatboy said,) and everything looks brilliant.
WolfHound wrote:
> Ant wrote:
There is no game that has been released here that
> has better
> graphics than MGS2. MGS2 DOES have amazing graphics, it's just that
>
> everyone seems to expect 'absolutely amazing' graphics.
Resident Evil
> games
> have always been crap.
Probably because they are on Gamecube,
> which Is why you say that. And anyway the guy was on about
> 'REALISM'.
>Wave Race?? I can just play Splashdown.
So you could, or
> you can go back to the series it models itself on.
Roque
> Leader??
> *COUGH* Jedi StarFighter *COUGH* Racer II. And Roque Leader not so much
> of
> a realistic game, and it's not a 3rd person adventure either.
You are a numb
> nut, Ive watched these games running, I own Starwars Starfighter and It Is
> uninspiring to play let alone look at. I've said that before. Face It, The top
> Sony Honcho wasn't wrong saying they would consider releasing the PS2 Successor
> in response to the prowess of the GC and Xbox.
Well perhaps that's because Nintendo decide to bring their console out 2 years after the PS2.
It's not surprising that the GC has better looking games, it's had ages to improve them. And a release date hasn't been announced yet??
And no, I'm not the numbnut, I was talking about the sequel. Notice the word JEDI StarFighter, the sequel!
And Roque Leader's not detailed! They all just do the same thing over and over!
> Ant wrote:
There is no game that has been released here that
> has better
> graphics than MGS2. MGS2 DOES have amazing graphics, it's just that
>
> everyone seems to expect 'absolutely amazing' graphics.
Resident Evil
> games
> have always been crap.
Probably because they are on Gamecube,
> which Is why you say that. And anyway the guy was on about
> 'REALISM'.
>Wave Race?? I can just play Splashdown.
So you could, or
> you can go back to the series it models itself on.
Roque
> Leader??
> *COUGH* Jedi StarFighter *COUGH* Racer II. And Roque Leader not so much
> of
> a realistic game, and it's not a 3rd person adventure either.
You are a numb
> nut, Ive watched these games running, I own Starwars Starfighter and It Is
> uninspiring to play let alone look at. I've said that before. Face It, The top
> Sony Honcho wasn't wrong saying they would consider releasing the PS2 Successor
> in response to the prowess of the GC and Xbox.
Well perhaps that's because Nintendo decide to bring their console out 2 years after the PS2.
It's not surprising that the GC has better looking games, it's had ages to improve them. And a release date hasn't been announced yet??
And no, I'm not the numbnut, I was talking about the sequel. Notice the word JEDI StarFighter, the sequel!
And Roque Leader's not detailed! They all just do the same thing over and over!
Ant wrote:
There is no game that has been released here that
> has better graphics than MGS2. MGS2 DOES have amazing graphics, it's just that
> everyone seems to expect 'absolutely amazing' graphics.
Resident Evil games
> have always been crap.
Probably because they are on Gamecube, which Is why you say that. And anyway the guy was on about 'REALISM'.
>Wave Race?? I can just play Splashdown.
So you could, or you can go back to the series it models itself on.
Roque
> Leader?? *COUGH* Jedi StarFighter *COUGH* Racer II. And Roque Leader not so much
> of a realistic game, and it's not a 3rd person adventure either.
You are a numb nut, Ive watched these games running, I own Starwars Starfighter and It Is uninspiring to play let alone look at. I've said that before. Face It, The top Sony Honcho wasn't wrong saying they would consider releasing the PS2 Successor in response to the prowess of the GC and Xbox.
There is no game that has been released here that
> has better graphics than MGS2. MGS2 DOES have amazing graphics, it's just that
> everyone seems to expect 'absolutely amazing' graphics.
Resident Evil games
> have always been crap.
Probably because they are on Gamecube, which Is why you say that. And anyway the guy was on about 'REALISM'.
>Wave Race?? I can just play Splashdown.
So you could, or you can go back to the series it models itself on.
Roque
> Leader?? *COUGH* Jedi StarFighter *COUGH* Racer II. And Roque Leader not so much
> of a realistic game, and it's not a 3rd person adventure either.
You are a numb nut, Ive watched these games running, I own Starwars Starfighter and It Is uninspiring to play let alone look at. I've said that before. Face It, The top Sony Honcho wasn't wrong saying they would consider releasing the PS2 Successor in response to the prowess of the GC and Xbox.
Sibs wrote:
> Ant wrote:
And Roque Leader not so much
> of a realistic game, and it's
> not a 3rd person adventure either.
NOT SO DETAILED!!! I'm sorry but how
> biased do you want to be? Have you seen the up close shots of the Death Star
> trench run and the HUGE star destroyers? Have you seen how detailed the tiny
> little ground troops are on the battle of hoth? Have you seen how detailed the
> craft are just in the hangers?!?
When the first movies of it were shown,
> people took a while to realise it wasn't the film being shown and you say it's
> not that detailed?!?
heh, no wonder I went overkill and blew everyone up in
> my story!
;-)
Erm...did I say detailed??
> Ant wrote:
And Roque Leader not so much
> of a realistic game, and it's
> not a 3rd person adventure either.
NOT SO DETAILED!!! I'm sorry but how
> biased do you want to be? Have you seen the up close shots of the Death Star
> trench run and the HUGE star destroyers? Have you seen how detailed the tiny
> little ground troops are on the battle of hoth? Have you seen how detailed the
> craft are just in the hangers?!?
When the first movies of it were shown,
> people took a while to realise it wasn't the film being shown and you say it's
> not that detailed?!?
heh, no wonder I went overkill and blew everyone up in
> my story!
;-)
Erm...did I say detailed??
Ant wrote:
And Roque Leader not so much
> of a realistic game, and it's not a 3rd person adventure either.
NOT SO DETAILED!!! I'm sorry but how biased do you want to be? Have you seen the up close shots of the Death Star trench run and the HUGE star destroyers? Have you seen how detailed the tiny little ground troops are on the battle of hoth? Have you seen how detailed the craft are just in the hangers?!?
When the first movies of it were shown, people took a while to realise it wasn't the film being shown and you say it's not that detailed?!?
heh, no wonder I went overkill and blew everyone up in my story!
;-)
And Roque Leader not so much
> of a realistic game, and it's not a 3rd person adventure either.
NOT SO DETAILED!!! I'm sorry but how biased do you want to be? Have you seen the up close shots of the Death Star trench run and the HUGE star destroyers? Have you seen how detailed the tiny little ground troops are on the battle of hoth? Have you seen how detailed the craft are just in the hangers?!?
When the first movies of it were shown, people took a while to realise it wasn't the film being shown and you say it's not that detailed?!?
heh, no wonder I went overkill and blew everyone up in my story!
;-)
Shocky, I think you meant Eternal Darkness. That's the one set over loads of different time periods with about 12 characters, the insanity meter and all those wierd effects when you start to go 'insane'...
Pass the drool bucket...
Pass the drool bucket...
Shocktrooper wrote:
> Ant wrote:
>I'd like to see a realistic game on the GameCube that can
> >easily beat MGS2 in graphically ability.
Well, there's Rogue Leader,
> Resident Evil, Wave Race, Too Human, (another game I can't remember its name -
> developed by Silicon Knights).
And when Perfect Dark 2 (or whatever it'll be
> called) it'll beat MGS2's graphical capability.
I know MGS2 will be superb
> an' all, but to be hinest - the graphics aren't superb, or mind-blowing - you've
> got to stop using it as a way out...using it as back-up against GameCube.
>
There's nothing graphically spectactular about MGS2.
SHOCKY
I thought you had more sense Shocky.
There is no game that has been released here that has better graphics than MGS2. MGS2 DOES have amazing graphics, it's just that everyone seems to expect 'absolutely amazing' graphics.
Resident Evil games have always been crap.
Wave Race?? I can just play Splashdown.
Roque Leader?? *COUGH* Jedi StarFighter *COUGH* Racer II. And Roque Leader not so much of a realistic game, and it's not a 3rd person adventure either.
> Ant wrote:
>I'd like to see a realistic game on the GameCube that can
> >easily beat MGS2 in graphically ability.
Well, there's Rogue Leader,
> Resident Evil, Wave Race, Too Human, (another game I can't remember its name -
> developed by Silicon Knights).
And when Perfect Dark 2 (or whatever it'll be
> called) it'll beat MGS2's graphical capability.
I know MGS2 will be superb
> an' all, but to be hinest - the graphics aren't superb, or mind-blowing - you've
> got to stop using it as a way out...using it as back-up against GameCube.
>
There's nothing graphically spectactular about MGS2.
SHOCKY
I thought you had more sense Shocky.
There is no game that has been released here that has better graphics than MGS2. MGS2 DOES have amazing graphics, it's just that everyone seems to expect 'absolutely amazing' graphics.
Resident Evil games have always been crap.
Wave Race?? I can just play Splashdown.
Roque Leader?? *COUGH* Jedi StarFighter *COUGH* Racer II. And Roque Leader not so much of a realistic game, and it's not a 3rd person adventure either.
Ant wrote:
>I'd like to see a realistic game on the GameCube that can >easily beat MGS2 in graphically ability.
Well, there's Rogue Leader, Resident Evil, Wave Race, Too Human, (another game I can't remember its name - developed by Silicon Knights).
And when Perfect Dark 2 (or whatever it'll be called) it'll beat MGS2's graphical capability.
I know MGS2 will be superb an' all, but to be hinest - the graphics aren't superb, or mind-blowing - you've got to stop using it as a way out...using it as back-up against GameCube.
There's nothing graphically spectactular about MGS2.
SHOCKY
>I'd like to see a realistic game on the GameCube that can >easily beat MGS2 in graphically ability.
Well, there's Rogue Leader, Resident Evil, Wave Race, Too Human, (another game I can't remember its name - developed by Silicon Knights).
And when Perfect Dark 2 (or whatever it'll be called) it'll beat MGS2's graphical capability.
I know MGS2 will be superb an' all, but to be hinest - the graphics aren't superb, or mind-blowing - you've got to stop using it as a way out...using it as back-up against GameCube.
There's nothing graphically spectactular about MGS2.
SHOCKY
I am the Tarrant wrote:
> Is PS2 envy like penis* envy?
:-) Nice one Tarrant... finally the topic has something to lighten it up, and make it funny. I`m not even going to get drawn into all that dribble.
> Is PS2 envy like penis* envy?
:-) Nice one Tarrant... finally the topic has something to lighten it up, and make it funny. I`m not even going to get drawn into all that dribble.
Page: